My Friend, the Always-Fun Dale Price….

offers an intriquing new argument for Romney I had not thought of:

This is half the reason I’m leaning toward voting for Romney: not that he’ll be better, but the press and currently hibernating protest movements will see “-R” after the President’s name and start covering this stuff again. Ditto the war in Afghanistan, ditto rendition, ditto the national debt, ditto the bad economy, ditto the QE bailout of the wealthy…

Vote Romney: Maybe Then the Media Will Start Doing Their Job Again!

Catchy!

  • http://davidgriffey.blogspot.com/ Dave G.

    There is truth to that, warped as it is. I’m never more aware of how rotten, evil, and full of hopelessness America is than when a Republican occupies the White House. I can still remember the change in how Clinton was covered versus how I had grown up seeing Reagan/Bush covered. As an independent born of a house of democrats, coming into adulthood in the 80s, that had a big impact on me.

  • http://losthunderlads.com Acilius

    I’d say that’s common sense, actually. When you vote for a candidate in a two-party system, you are voting not only for that candidate’s personality, management style, policy profile, network of supporters, etc, to control the office. You are also voting for the other party and the people and institutions associated with it to serve as the main opposition to that candidate. So if you think that the Democrats and their supporters would do a better job keeping a Republican president honest than the Republicans and their supporters have shown the ability to do in their capacity as the opposition to Mr O, that is a perfectly logical reason to vote for Mr Romney. As it happens, I don’t see much reason to think that either the Democrats or the Republicans have much to offer as parties of opposition, but there is nothing perverse or contrary about giving thought to the quality of the opposition each candidate is likely to face if elected.

  • Michael F.

    Very funny and very true.

  • Dale Price

    Thank you for the hat-tip, kind sir!

  • http://www.rosariesforlife.com Dave

    That actually makes sense. I’d rather find a way to decapitate the media control over our country, but until I do, this argument is very solid. At least SOME of the dastardly things (as Dale mentioned) that both the Dems and GOP do would be considered wrong, and get media coverage, if the President was Republican.

  • Ted Seeber

    That’s almost as good as the one I found yesterday- if Romney wins the White House, he will be in Washington DC’s 3rd Ward as a Mormon- and be forced to interact with one of the most diverse Mormon wards in the United States on a Weekly basis. Apparently, within the same ward as the White House, there are not only tons of Democrat Mormons, but also some pretty bad neighborhoods, the likes of which end up with people approaching the Bishop’s Pantry out of desperation every month when the food stamps dry up. Not to mention, it’s DC, so there is a pretty good African American population in the Ward, unusual for any Mormon Ward.

    (for us Catholics, a Ward is like a Mass at your parish, except it’s assigned to you by address, you don’t choose which one to go to- more like how parishes used to work before Vatican II and are still supposed to, but if in addition to parish assignment, your address also dictated which Mass you went to on any given Sunday).

    For those who are a little more Catholic Worker than Republican, the idea of Romney having to weekly meet with members of the 47% indicates enough of a possibility for conversion that it is almost worth voting for him on that alone.

    • http://www.likelierthings.com Jon W

      Like the Secret Service will let him do that, though.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X